Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | plabrh1 |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) |
Date | |
Msg-id | 009301c75b7b$02f90e10$be01a8c0@plabxpm01 Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
List | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks Josh, I'll look for the earlier one and try to add it there... -Paul -----Original Message----- From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:jd@commandprompt.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:09 AM To: Paul Silveira Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) Paul Silveira wrote: > Hello, > > I just wanted to voice my opinion for this feature... I've implemented a > few Production applicaitons with PostgreSQL now and would die for that > feature. Right now, I am constantly trying to find way's to make my data > more available. Paul unfortunately you have responded to a hijacked thread. Jonah was speaking about a project that he wishes would have been accepted which was called Full Disjunctions. I have not read the read-only queries during wal replay thread but I can assure you that Jonah's response had nothing to do with it. Joshua D. Drake I've even resulted to using pg_dump to create read only > copies of the database and placed them behind load balancers to make the > data more available. Something like this would allow me to quickly leverage > a read only node to scale out the applicaiton... If it can at all be built, > it would get my first, second and third vote. :) > > Regards, > > Paul Silveira > > > > > Jonah H. Harris-2 wrote: >> On 2/26/07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >>> Jonah, I have no idea what "fault" you are trying to blame on the >>> community in the above statement. The author didn't discuss the idea >>> with the community before spending months on it so we have no obligation >>> to accept it in the core. >> You're missing the point entirely. The majority of the (vocal) >> community didn't even want the feature and as such, failed to provide >> viable suggestions for him to move forward. As the majority of the >> community didn't want the feature, it wouldn't have made a difference >> when he proposed it; which would have remained negative nonetheless. >> >> -- >> Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324 >> EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 >> 33 Wood Ave S, 3rd Floor | jharris@enterprisedb.com >> Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/ >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate >> >> > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
pgsql-hackers by date: